Would it be possible to bring up specific instances or better still links to the relevant discussions? I don't know what place would be best to continue this discussion, but I assume this thread is OK. If you'd rather, you can email me directly. My interest is mainly to understand the way things have worked at P2PU better. I personally can't imagine that all problems or disagreements would be solved by the existence of elections or positions, and I think it would be more useful to understand the specific disagreements and problems in their own right. (Unless the disagreement is purely about the existence or non-existence of elections/positions/etc.) At present, the policy is supposed to be based on "rough consensus" - so if there wasn't a consensus around the issues you brought up, then, yeah, the discussion was likely to just be over. I think the only thing to do in such a case is to go do the relevant work on your own, or do it somewhere else, or work really hard to win people over, or just wait. I don't see it as part of any organisation's responsibility to do everything that "contributors" say or wish.